How Much does the Government Really Know about You ?

Posted on October 6, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

If you think instances of government surveillance are isolated, you need to think again. It’s not a matter of if your online and offline activities are being tracked, it’s just a matter of when. And while you only have so much control over this fact, educating yourself can help you make wiser and more informed decisions.

American Concerns Over Privacy

If you feel like Big Brother is watching, you aren’t alone. It’s no longer just crazy old guys in tinfoil hats that are convinced the government is tracking and analyzing their every move. Thanks to recent developments and discoveries over the past few years — including the Edward Snowden whistleblower incident — millions of Americans have been forced to confront their past naivety and embrace the reality before them.

According to a recent Pew Research survey, a majority of Americans now believe their online and offline activities are being monitored by a variety of companies and organizations — including some within the government. Interesting takeaways include:

63 percent of Americans say it’s impossible to go through daily life without having the government collect their data.
84 percent of Americans feel they have very little/no control over the data that the government chooses to collect.
66 percent of Americans say the risks of collecting data about them outweigh the benefits.
64 percent of Americans are somewhat/very concerned about how their data is used.
78 percent of Americans have very little/no understanding of what the government does with the data that’s collected on them.

“There is also a collective sentiment that data security is more elusive today than in the past,” Pew Research explains. “When asked whether they think their personal data is less secure, more secure or about the same as it was five years ago, 70% of adults say their personal data is less secure. Only 6% report that they believe their data is more secure today than it was in the past.”

In other words, things are getting worse, not better. As technology advances and more of our lives are conducted online, data collection will continue to balloon. Whether that’s good or bad… we’ll let you be the judge of that.

What the Government Knows About You

Though we’ll never truly know how much the government knows about us as Americans, it’s clear that they know plenty. And that’s coming straight from the horse’s mouth.

Just check out this page from the NSA and notice quotes like:

“…IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR.”

And…

“WHAT IF WE COULD BUILD A NATIONAL DATA WAREHOUSE CONTAINING INFORMATION ABOUT EVERY PERSON IN THE UNITED STATES? THANKS TO SECRET INTERPRETATIONS OF THE PATRIOT ACT, TOP-SECRET FOURTH AMENDMENT EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED BY THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE COURT, AND BROAD COOPERATION AT THE LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LEVEL, WE CAN!”

According to the NSA, they’re already tracking/plan to track information like internet searches, emails sent and received, websites visited, blogging activity (including posts you read and comment on), social media activity, photos viewed online, videos watched, phone call records, video calls, online purchases, legal documents, financial information, travel documents, educational records, DNA, facial recognition, cable TV shows watched and recorded, health records, and more.

Their reasoning for collecting all of this data?

“THERE IS NO WAY TO PREDICT IN ADVANCE WHICH CRUCIAL PIECE OF DATA WILL BE THE KEY TO REVEALING A POTENTIAL PLOT.”

Sounds reasonable, but also quite auspicious. The NSA is basically admitting that they collect a ton of information without much purpose or direction in the hopes that they can connect the dots in situations where a crime is about to occur/has occurred.

The NSA claims it treasures the U.S. Constitution and the rights of all people. It does so by keeping private data secured in a custom database software known as Cloudbase. This system has detailed security and control access all the way down to each individual cell.

While we’re talking about the United States, the truth is that government data collection is not a uniquely American issue. It’s something that crosses borders and languages. And it’s possible for one individual to have his or her information collected by multiple nations around the world.

Any time a global citizen enters into a new country, that nation takes the personal information from the application and puts it in a “data warehouse.” This information can then be used, shared, or accessed by the government and related entities in whatever way they see fit.

Staying Private and Safe

Let’s be clear about one thing up front: It’s nearly impossible for you to prevent the government from learning what they want to know about you. Unless you go off the grid and disappear from modern society, the government has the ability to keep tabs on you. (Whether or not they do anything with the information they collect is another matter.)

Having said that, it’s always wise to be thinking about how you can stay private and safe. Whether from government entities or companies that you do business with, here are some simple tactics you can use to keep your personal information more secure:

Always read private policies whenever you visit a website, download a piece of software, create an account, etc. It’s easy to skip over the fine print, but there may be valuable information inside.
When on public WiFi, always use a VPN to encrypt the data you’re sending over the network. (This probably won’t stop the government from collecting your information, but it will make it exponentially more difficult for hackers and other organizations to gather your data.)
Don’t overshare information on social media. While the government has plenty of powerful tools for collecting your data, social networking sites are among their favorite sources of information. The less you share, the less they know.

It’s not a matter of whether or not the government is collecting your information. It’s a matter of how much data they’re pulling and how it’s being used. Keep this in mind and try to be more intentional about your privacy moving forward.

U.S News

Major Hurricane Brews in Gulf of Mexico, Threatens Louisiana, Florida

Malcolm Bright – October 6, 2020https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-3899985184597836&output=html&h=250&slotname=9448058222&adk=851238222&adf=2063548771&w=300&lmt=1601997199&psa=1&guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&format=300×250&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftrulytimes.com%2Fhow-much-does-the-government-know-about-you.html&flash=0&wgl=1&adsid=ChEI8Kvw-wUQiNPJ8OfEieiQARJMAESj2_z-sswGEHXFC3g8ZzHSSlG-qGff2X9aK8yIsnkiee16geo9hGJDPON6Io-Qt7RvlUkGasskoJWhkPDekg_Pd_iNa4g0F-tXOg&tt_state=W3siaXNzdWVyT3JpZ2luIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hZHNlcnZpY2UuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbSIsInN0YXRlIjowfV0.&dt=1601998332774&bpp=4&bdt=899&idt=693&shv=r20201001&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3D3619e8813d8f450d%3AT%3D1601998320%3AS%3DALNI_MZhA3RnH4oH5O0puLEQpa1hMfoyWw&prev_fmts=0x0%2C672x280%2C672x168%2C712x970%2C712x88_as%2C672x403&nras=3&correlator=4802807135709&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1638564359.1601998320&ga_sid=1601998333&ga_hid=393095786&ga_fc=0&iag=0&icsg=741937426431&dssz=39&mdo=0&mso=0&u_tz=-240&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=1138&u_w=712&u_ah=1138&u_aw=712&u_cd=24&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&adx=20&ady=4784&biw=712&bih=970&scr_x=0&scr_y=730&eid=21066973&oid=3&psts=AGkb-H97h75h52e6rRUP7GJfEcKq4dDnwFpka0jOevtLkKfK2lSvOhrKDS-ZZTY4Cto%2CAGkb-H9ttv55w9Qc5vp5INk6o4kK91ZY2roSC1K-kYPR1ajINDkWHiHukhT1GFGqcyF80eA26R_HcU3kQhsYBG2UCA%2CAGkb-H9J7-02zlAMlVo25UCN4TSwkyiej30llsXv4RQZiZGBjmUnMJbrICFWRjg0xEk%2CAGkb-H9BS8OgIoiq45w5jlVlZB7NBjFtp2Dmf2Rrw0wL6ALmQMXnjSSnutKYP1rq3-MIcQgyACMLfA&pvsid=3089609048622955&pem=947&ref=http%3A%2F%2Ffreerepublic.com%2F&rx=0&eae=0&fc=1920&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C712%2C0%2C712%2C1066%2C712%2C1066&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7CoeEbr%7C&abl=CS&pfx=0&fu=8192&bc=31&jar=2020-10-06-02&ifi=4&uci=a!4&btvi=4&fsb=1&xpc=NnAdr3vgmZ&p=https%3A//trulytimes.com&dtd=3540 U.S News

Louisiana House committee advances tax break proposals

Malcolm Bright – October 6, 2020 U.S News

Texas police officer charged with murder after reportedly killing black man who was described as a ‘pillar of the community’

Malcolm Bright – October 6, 2020 U.S News

Watch Fed Chair Powell Ask Congress For More Fiscal Stimulus

Malcolm Bright – October 6, 2020

RELATED NEWS

Politics

25 Questions Kamala Harris Should Be Asked in the Debate

Rebecca Mansour – October 6, 2020 Politics

Watch: CNN’s John Berman Demands Producer Not Show Trump Taking Off Mask — ‘Please Take It Off Because That’s Going to Kill People’

Trent Baker – October 6, 2020 Politics

WashPost: Kenosha Riot Casualties Lived Poor, Chaotic Lives in Outsourced City

Neil Munro – October 6, 2020 Politics

Biden Scolds Trump: ‘Embarrassing for the Nation’ he Caught Coronavirus

Simon Kent – October 6, 2020 Politics

Donald Trump: ‘We Are Learning to Live with COVID’ Just Like the Flu

Charlie Spiering – October 6, 2020

TRENDING NEWS

U.S News

Minnesota Rep. Seeing Ilhan Omar Voter Fraud Went to FBI But Due to Languid Response Contacted Project Veritas (VIDEO)

Malcolm Bright – September 29, 2020 Politics

Report: Laptop, Memory Sticks to Program Philadelphia Voting Machines Stolen

Joshua Caplan – September 30, 2020 U.S News

Trump Gets Third Nomination for Nobel Peace Prize

Zachary Stieber – September 28, 2020 U.S News

Joe Biden had a Campaign Ad and Stickers Printed and Ready to Go Immediately After NY Times Broke its Trump Tax Story

Malcolm Bright – September 28, 2020 Opinion

The US should host a Royal Navy submarine at Guam

Malcolm Bright – September 9, 2020 Politics

Democrats Launch Smear Attacks on Amy Coney Barrett’s Adopted Children

Matthew Boyle – September 26, 2020 U.S News

Biden Says Arabic Word Frequently Used by Muslims During Debate

Erin Coates – September 30, 2020 Politics

Joe Biden Exploited S-Corporation Loophole to Avoid Payroll Tax

Matthew Boyle – September 28, 2020

Self-censorship is Greatest Threat to Free Speech

Posted on October 6, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

Editor’s Note: The following is an excerpt from The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense.

Many people in the West have a poor understanding of the concept of free speech. Whenever I mute or block someone on social media, a cacophony of fools will accuse me of being a free speech hypocrite for

“silencing their voice.” They do not understand that I have the right to walk away from their online taunts, insults, and idiocy. To do so is not “restricting” their speech but expressing my right to avoid listening to them. This is an obvious point, and yet many people are confused by it. A second mistake is the mindlessly aped line: “Social media companies are not the government. They have the right to choose which content will be carried on their platforms.” In a sane world, this would a laughable position to hold, and yet it is endlessly repeated without any reflection on its nefarious implications. Google, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter have more global control over us than all other companies combined. It is not hyperbole to say that they have more collective power, in terms of the information they control, than all the rulers, priests, and politicians of history. If knowledge is power, then these social media giants are nearly all-powerful when they decide which information we can have and whether we can be allowed a social media platform. Big tech companies routinely ban right-leaning commentators, but of course this is all an unfortunate “algorithmic coincidence.” What could be more sinister?

Another tool that online companies use to repress free speech is going after your wallet. Of the 1,000+ clips on my YouTube channel, roughly one-third have been demonetized (albeit some are monetized again once I file a request for a manual review). Many of my clips are demonetized prior to my even posting them publicly. In other words, an algorithm automatically demonetizes my clips as a default setting. In other instances, money exchange portals such as Patreon and PayPal, which are used by online content creators to solicit financial support, have banned individuals whom they feel have violated one of their tenets of acceptable speech. Carl Benjamin (a.k.a. Sargon of Akkad), an influential

YouTuber on whose show I have appeared on two occasions, was booted from Patreon. The company had uncovered a clip where he used the “N-word” as a means of mocking racists. Despite this context and the fact that the clip had not been produced on the Patreon platform, a key feature of their terms of use (and hence not supported by his patrons), they deleted his account. This caused a gigantic backlash against Patreon. My good friends Jordan Peterson and Dave Rubin left the platform in protest, and many people pledged to boycott the company. But the boycott indirectly punished many other content creators who lost a huge amount of revenue (it cost me more than two-thirds of my financial support). As a libertarian, I am a fervent proponent of small government. I despise the never-ending and ever-increasing governmental encroachments into our daily lives. But it seems obvious that these online companies must be regulated as utilities. Just as your electricity or phone line is not shut off if the electric company or phone company doesn’t like what you say, social media platforms should not be in the business of monitoring and punishing speech.

As a result of my public engagement, I have become a global confessor for students and academics suffering under the political correctness that dominates our universities. A common theme in these first-person testimonies is the necessity of self-censorship lest one be punished for violating progressive orthodoxy. The fear is so great that professors thanking me for my defense of classical liberal values often request that I not share their identities (which I never do without their permission). Imagine for a moment how chilling this is. Below I share excerpts of a few representative emails sent to me:

“I’m a 47-year-old white male who because of an injury made a choice to return to school. . . . In the first year, to maintain full-time status, I was forced to take another social justice-Black Lives Matter course. Students are not allowed to challenge or question the course content because that’s considered disrespectful and may disrupt someone’s safe space. I believe I’m a respectful student with good attendance and whose marks are in the mid-eighties. That said, after a few weeks of the one-sided syllabus, I’m considering dropping out of the program and leaving school entirely. This leftist academic world is a little too much for me.

“The reason I am contacting you is because, as an honors cognitive student, part of my requirement is to complete 12 credits of research. However, because of purely political reasons (I am apparently a violent, misogynist, racist Trump supporter), I have not only lost my job at a very prestigious behavioural neuroscience laboratory at [redacted], but my name has been removed from a publication on research I personally conducted, and the lead researcher has told me he would never work with me ever again.

“I very much appreciate your courage to fight the cancer that is taking over American academia. People like me feel cheated at their attempt to pursue a tenure track career. It only takes a glimpse at the job offerings that the Modern Languages Association publishes each year, to understand that what is expected from recent graduates like me is political activism, and I refuse to mix that with my academic interests.

“I will save you my long stories of dealing and suffering career-wise from politically correct nonsense from the directions of feminism, gender ideology, trans-extremism, and Islamophilia. I am trying to keep a lid on things for now, as my wife is a very promising academic but hasn’t secured a position yet. I know if I started voicing my thoughts and arguments on social media, she’d be completely shut out of the academy.

“As a fellow professor who has been frustrated by the discourse within academia on issues such as political correctness, moral relativism, and social justice, I’d like to thank you for speaking up the way you have been from within academia. . . . I have nevertheless been frustrated by the conformism and group think I see and hear around me. I see otherwise very reasonable and capable people abandoning reason and cowing to the narrative of the regressive left on many social issues.”

When I told this professor to engage and debate these issues openly, the professor replied:

“These are all things which I would like to get involved in once the tenure decision is behind me (about one year to go). As upsetting as it is, one fears expressing unpopular social ideas prior to tenure. In the meantime, please keep fighting the good fight for freedom of speech and against thought policing and orthodoxy.”

These are not emails sent to me from dissidents in North Korea, Yemen, or the former Soviet Union. Ideological Stalinism is the daily reality on North American college campuses. Any freedom-loving person should be appalled by this, and yet most academics yawn in complicit apathy and cowardly inaction. They are too worried about their selfish, careerist considerations to weigh in on these matters. They are happy to tell me privately that they support my efforts but “please, Dr. Saad, don’t share my name. I don’t want people to know that I share your views.” Why should people in a free country be afraid of saying what they believe? Think about that, and you will know the direction that the “progressives” want to take us.

Deep States Have Conspiracies; President Trump Does Not

Posted on October 6, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

To those who say President Trump’s COVID illness was a made-up conspiracy: HE COULDN’T PULL IT OFF IF HE WANTED. Unlike a Joe Biden, he doesn’t have the entire media, school system, bought-and-paid corporate elites, academia, corrupt judges, tyrannical governors and legislators, Hollywood, sports, musical celebrities and gullible Democratic voters on his side.

All he has are himself and millions of Americans who still love their country and their freedom. THAT’S IT. They don’t want a conspiracy; and they do not need one.

Michael J. Hurd

Learning About the State

Posted on October 5, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

What we’ve seen in the last week is the state at work — and by the state, I do not mean a particular set of leaders. If we watch carefully, we can gain insight into what the state is and why our fundamental problem extends far above and below the political party system.

The moment is complicated by the upcoming election, so some people are distracted by the circus of McCain vs. Obama and all the characters associated with that silly little battle. What they are looking at is really the veneer. It is a covering designed to prevent you from seeing what the state is and why it matters.

The party system and the elections lead us to believe that we live under conditions that Martin Van Creveld calls the personal state. (I’m relying here on his important book The Rise and Decline of the State.) This is the ancient form of the state under which all the resources the state owns are the personal property of the king or ruler. The ruler is the state. If he dies, the state dies with him.

It is very much in the interest of democracy to perpetuate this idea that we are living in a personal state. This way all credit for the well-being of the nation falls to one person or persons. They are elected. If things go badly, people are encouraged to blame these elected officials and vote them out of office. New people are given a new chance to do better.

But the truth is that the personal state is long gone from history in the developed world. In the 17th century, we begin to see the emergence of the impersonal state. Under this approach, the ruler does not use his own resources. He is a manager. If he dies, nothing changes. The state itself takes on a permanent form. It is not elected. It is hired and lives on regardless of the changes at the top.

The United States has never hosted a personal state. The president was always to be the manager and overseer of a tiny state that ruled with the permission of the people and the lower orders of government: the people and government are one, and this would serve as a check on power. Of course this was a mistake, a reflection of the naïveté of the classical-liberal position.

In time, the United States took on all the features of an impersonal nation-state. It developed a permanent bureaucracy, especially after the tragic end of the “spoils system.” It developed a money machine and monopolized and created its own currency. It began to host its own unelected military that was a “professional” fighting force and not a citizen militia. It became home to a million hangers-on who made the state their careers and their source of economic security.

Today, the state embodies all the worst features of the unaccountable, impersonal leviathan that had been the goal of every bad-guy political dreamer in world history. We can see this in operation during the financial meltdown. The people making the decisions and conducting policy were not elected by anyone. They report to no one. They are the Secretary of the Treasury and the head of the Fed, and each represents certain private-sector interests among the financial elite. They conduct their policies based on their private assessment of what is good for those they represent, and they do it in cooperation with the permanently entrenched bureaucracy and financial managers who rule the country.

Only after the plans were in place and announced did the impersonal state approach the personal part of the state for codification and confirmation, which the personal state was glad to grant with conditions. We can also see this at work in the political parties. McCain and Obama were quick to endorse the entire bailout [following the 2008 financial crisis] on the grounds that it is a national emergency, so, of course, they must set aside their partisan differences.

They always set aside their partisan differences! This is the way the impersonal state works. It is not the people we elect who are in charge. They are only the human face on the machine. If they don’t know this before the election, they quickly discover it after the election. They find themselves on a conveyor belt of tasks and photo-ops and duties. These consume them completely. They are in awe of the operation of the state and feel immediately powerless to do anything about it.

The same goes for those whom the new president hires to run his cabinet departments. So far as the permanent bureaucracy is concerned, they don’t even need to know the name of the new secretary, except to make up silly jingles and use his or her name in jokes. The new hires might start silly new programs or make perfunctory changes, but the permanent class that runs the department knows that it only needs — if it disagrees — to wait out their tenure until things get back to normal. They know that they are the gears of the engine and that the supposed driver is just the temporary front man.

In this sense, who wins or who doesn’t win the election doesn’t matter nearly as much as we are led to believe. It’s true that Bush started a war when he didn’t have to. Someone else might have done better. It is also true that Obama could fire up a range of new regulations and programs and that McCain could start ever more wars.

It is also true that even without a sitting president and without a Congress, the state would function pretty much as it does today. That’s a frightening-but-true statement.

And yet there is no reason to despair. In some ways, impersonal states are just as vulnerable as personal ones, sometimes even more so, since they rule without ideological conviction. The state always and everywhere constitutes a tiny minority of the population, Murray Rothbard argues. It is outnumbered by the people many times over. For this reason, it must rely on a false consciousness to sustain its rule.

This is why Mises writes that

In the long run even the most despotic governments with all their brutality and cruelty are no match for ideas. Eventually the ideology that has won the support of the majority will prevail and cut the ground from under the tyrant’s feet. Then the oppressed many will rise in rebellion and overthrow their masters.

Van Creveld himself says that the state can ultimately be done in by both ideological and technological forces that race past the state and its ossified ways. The impersonal state relies most strongly on a changeless setting in which to manage its affairs. We live in times of incredible change. And state crises like the Wall Street meltdown can open up cracks in the official climate of opinion.

There is another point we learn from these observations: working within the machinery of a political party is a futile path for serious change. Real change comes from working in the world of enterprise and ideas.Author:

Contact Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, and editor of LewRockwell.com.

Pope Francis Goes Full Communist

Posted on October 5, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

In an encyclical published on Sunday, Pope Francis announced that he’d had an epiphany thanks to the Wuhan virus: It’s time to ditch capitalism. But that’s not all. He believes, too, that in a time of a serious infectious disease, we should focus even harder on open borders. And he blithely upended almost two millennia of Church doctrine by doing away with St. Augustine’s “just war” theory.

These actions reflect Francis’s Catholic upbringing within the communist “liberation theology” of the Latin American church. They may also show the effects of his ongoing alliance with Chinese communists and with Muslims.

Fox Business sums up the gist of Francis’s communist dreams (emphasis mine):

“Aside from the differing ways that various countries responded to the crisis, their inability to work together became quite evident,” Francis wrote. “Anyone who thinks that the only lesson to be learned was the need to improve what we were already doing, or to refine existing systems and regulations, is denying reality.”

He cited the grave loss of millions of jobs as a result of the virus as evidence of the need for politicians to listen to popular movements, unions and marginalized groups and to craft more just social and economic policies.

“The fragility of world systems in the face of the pandemic has demonstrated that not everything can be resolved by market freedom,” he wrote. “It is imperative to have a proactive economic policy directed at ‘promoting an economy that favours productive diversity and business creativity’ and makes it possible for jobs to be created, and not cut.”’

[snip]

As an outgrowth of that, Francis rejected the concept of an absolute right to property for individuals, stressing instead the “social purpose” and common good that must come from sharing the Earth’s resources. He repeated his criticism of the “perverse” global economic system, which he said consistently keeps the poor on the margins while enriching the few — an argument he made most fully in his 2015 landmark environmental encyclical “Laudato Sii” (Praised Be).

I know from experience that, when people read what Francis wrote, many will say that the church has always been socialist in orientation. That’s untrue. Jesus distinguished the realm of faith from the political realm. When he spoke of giving up property, he was speaking to individuals, not calling for communism.

Francis also fails to recognize that our current economic problems aren’t because the free market failed. They’re because leftists slammed the brakes on the free market.

The Pope used this encyclical to reiterate his endless push to erase borders:

Much of the new encyclical repeats Francis’ well-known preaching about the need to welcome and value migrants and his rejection of the nationalistic, isolationist policies of many of today’s political leaders.

Lastly, the Pope seeks something he calls a greater “human fraternity.” In doing so, he relies upon a document he composed with the grand imam of Egypt’s Al-Azhar.

The Pope is perhaps too naïve to recognize that, in Islam, the house of fraternity and peace (Dar al-Islam) is a world in which everyone is Islamic. Outside of the Islamic world is the world of war (Dar al-Harb), and every faithful Muslim must wage jihad to achieve that “peaceful,” fraternal world. Or, as Tacitus wrote when quoting Calgacus, a Caledonian who fought Rome’s imperial reach, “they [the Romans] make a desert and call it peace.”

Pope Francis, bathed in ahistorical ignorance, also concluded that there can be no “just wars”:

“It is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a ‘just war,’” Francis wrote in the most controversial new element of the encyclical.

Both the Chinese and the Islamists must be delighted to read those words. Hitler would have liked them too. Had Frances been in the Papacy during WWII, all of Europe would have been enslaved to Germany, and all Jews, not just six million, would have been slaughtered. Homosexuals, gypsies, people with mental and physical disabilities, and anyone else that the Germans dehumanized would have also found their way to the gas chambers.

As with everything he’s done since attaining the papal throne, Frances intends to undo all of the good work that the great John Paul II did in pursuit of human freedom and dignity.

Pope Francis Goes Full Communist

Posted on October 5, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

By Andrea Widburg

Fox Business sums up the gist of Francis’s communist dreams (emphasis mine):

“Aside from the differing ways that various countries responded to the crisis, their inability to work together became quite evident,” Francis wrote. “Anyone who thinks that the only lesson to be learned was the need to improve what we were already doing, or to refine existing systems and regulations, is denying reality.”
He cited the grave loss of millions of jobs as a result of the virus as evidence of the need for politicians to listen to popular movements, unions and marginalized groups and to craft more just social and economic policies.
“The fragility of world systems in the face of the pandemic has demonstrated that not everything can be resolved by market freedom,” he wrote. “It is imperative to have a proactive economic policy directed at ‘promoting an economy that favours productive diversity and business creativity’ and makes it possible for jobs to be created, and not cut.”’
[snip]
As an outgrowth of that, Francis rejected the concept of an absolute right to property for individuals, stressing instead the “social purpose” and common good that must come from sharing the Earth’s resources. He repeated his criticism of the “perverse” global economic system, which he said consistently keeps the poor on the margins while enriching the few — an argument he made most fully in his 2015 landmark environmental encyclical “Laudato Sii” (Praised Be).

Francis also fails to recognize that our current economic problems aren’t because the free market failed. They’re because leftists slammed the brakes on the free market.

The Pope used this encyclical to reiterate his endless push to erase borders:

Much of the new encyclical repeats Francis’ well-known preaching about the need to welcome and value migrants and his rejection of the nationalistic, isolationist policies of many of today’s political leaders.

Lastly, the Pope seeks something he calls a greater “human fraternity.” In doing so, he relies upon a document he composed with the grand imam of Egypt’s Al-Azhar.

Pope Francis, bathed in ahistorical ignorance, also concluded that there can be no “just wars”:

“It is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a ‘just war,’” Francis wrote in the most controversial new element of the encyclical.

As with everything he’s done since attaining the papal throne, Frances intends to undo all of the good work that the great John Paul II did in pursuit of human freedom and dignity.

Image: Pope Francis. YouTube screengrab.null

Fox Business sums up the gist of Francis’s communist dreams (emphasis mine):

The fragility of world systems in the face of the pandemic has demonstrated that not everything can be resolved by market freedom,” he wrote. “It is imperative to have a proactive economic policy directed at ‘promoting an economy that favours productive diversity and business creativity’ and makes it possible for jobs to be created, and not cut.”’
[snip]
As an outgrowth of that, Francis rejected the concept of an absolute right to property for individuals, stressing instead the “social purpose” and common good that must come from sharing the Earth’s resources. He repeated his criticism of the “perverse” global economic system, which he said consistently keeps the poor on the margins while enriching the few — an argument he made most fully in his 2015 landmark environmental encyclical “Laudato Sii” (Praised Be).

Francis also fails to recognize that our current economic problems aren’t because the free market failed. They’re because leftists slammed the brakes on the free market.

The Pope used this encyclical to reiterate his endless push to erase borders:

Much of the new encyclical repeats Francis’ well-known preaching about the need to welcome and value migrants and his rejection of the nationalistic, isolationist policies of many of today’s political leaders.

Lastly, the Pope seeks something he calls a greater “human fraternity.” In doing so, he relies upon a document he composed with the grand imam of Egypt’s Al-Azhar.

Pope Francis, bathed in ahistorical ignorance, also concluded that there can be no “just wars”:

“It is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a ‘just war,’” Francis wrote in the most controversial new element of the encyclical.

As with everything he’s done since attaining the papal throne, Frances intends to undo all of the good work that the great John Paul II did in pursuit of human freedom and dignity.

The Real Reason Leftists Can’t or Won’t Wish President Trump a Speedy Recovery

Posted on October 5, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

When the news broke that President Trump had contracted the coronavirus, many of his supporters immediately began to pray for his recovery, while many Democrats were thrilled. Some, including former Hillary Clinton staffer Zara Rahim, even expressed the hope that he would die. The sharply divergent reactions revealed yet again the growing divide in American society, as they demonstrate that the left and the right today are operating from two vastly different and irreconcilable worldviews.null

Leftists celebrating Trump’s illness were many, and they made no effort to hide their sentiments. Chris Rock yukked it up on Saturday Night Live, saying: “President Trump is in the hospital from COVID and I just wanna say my heart goes out to COVID.” Film critic Simon Abrams tweeted: “For once, I’m rooting for the virus.” Daniel Golson, staff editor at Car and Driver, chimed in with “I don’t feel bad about hoping he dies because I’ve been hoping that since 2015.”

Many conservatives have been appalled at these reactions, and have pointed to them to illustrate how deranged the left has become in its hatred for the president. They’ve noted that the right reacted to the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with condolences and expressions of regret, without regard for the fact that Ginsburg was the embodiment of a leftist activist judge with no interest in respecting constitutional restraints. Many have asked why leftists can’t react with similar charity when someone among the dissidents from their agenda falls ill, even their primary bête noire, President Trump.

The answer is in this as in so many other areas, the left and the right are working from premises that are more or less polar opposites. Jesus says “Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44). This has long been interpreted as meaning that one should treat everyone, even one’s political opponents, with respect, and have compassion for them when they suffer. This remained a cultural ideal long after many Americans began to discard their Christian faith and is still taken for granted among many people, albeit in the United States increasingly only among conservatives of all faiths.https://b78349d464f65618208c3cceeae7a15e.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html

That former Hillary staffer, Zara Rahim, in contrast, is a Muslim. The Qur’an doesn’t say that believers should love their enemies. Instead, it says “Muhammad is the apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are ruthless to unbelievers, merciful to one another” (48:29). What flows from this is that one should not have respect for one’s political foes, but rather, remain intent on destroying them.

Of course, most of the Leftists who have been cheering Trump’s coronavirus and passionately hoping (if not praying) for his death are not Muslim and never will be. But the leftist/Islamic alliance is manifest in numerous ways these days, including the fact that Zara Rahim is a top-level Democratic Party operative, and that Joe Biden has repeatedly engaged in the most shameless Islamopandering, and the power and influence of first-term Muslim Representatives Ilhan Omar (D-Mogadishu) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Gaza) among congressional leadership, and the collaboration of Black Lives Matter with Palestinian jihadis, and much more.

This is an alliance of convenience based upon a shared goal—the destruction of the United States of America as a free republic—but it is more as well. The secular Left agrees with the idea that one should be ruthless to one’s enemies and merciful only to one’s friends. Leftists share with Islamic supremacists the idea that one’s enemies should not be loved, or prayed for, but only treated ruthlessly and destroyed by any means possible.null

This scorched-earth world view has not been a constant in American politics. As Rating America’s Presidents shows, it wasn’t all that long ago that Democrats as well as Republicans shared the world view that was derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition. Politicians of both parties took for granted that one should treat one’s political opposition with decency and respect, and could expect the same in return.

But no more. The left is increasingly not just post-Christian, but anti-Christian, and not just American liberal, but Marxist and anti-American. Leftists have a completely different understanding of how the world works from the one that still prevails among most conservatives. The sooner the right wakes up to this fact and begins to prepare for more ruthlessness and hatred from the Left, the safer every patriotic American (which is not by any stretch of the imagination all of them) will be.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 21 books, including the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

The Political Spectrum and its Correct Delineation

Posted on October 5, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

NOTE: The history of civilization is not about the haves vs. the have-nots, nor right vs. left. The history of civilization is the struggle between liberty and tyranny.

The Artful Dilettante

If we want to navigate through complex territory, we need an accurate map. If we do not have a good map, we are likely to get lost. If we want to understand the political landscape, we need a sound paradigm by which to orientate ourselves. If we do not have a good paradigm, we are likely to lose our bearing and make wrong judgments. One of the reasons why so much of our political discourse is so confounding and unfruitful is because our paradigm is faulty.

The left-right map we have been given to navigate the political landscape is incorrect. It depicts the political spectrum as populated on the far left by hardline communists and socialists such as Lenin, Stalin, Castro. On the other end – on the far right – we have fascists like Hitler and Mussolini. These two camps stand on the opposite extremes and in between there is everyone else. In this model, the American Democrats are left of center while the Republicans are right of center.

Incorrect: Conventional understanding of the political spectrum

Here is how you can quickly see there something wrong with this paradigm: both Stalin and Hitler were socialists and big government totalitarians whose ideological underpinnings had their roots in the teachings of Karl Marx (see here about Hitler’s socialism). But if these two delineate the whole length of the political spectrum, where, then, do we fit limited government types such classical liberals or today’s libertarians? In the conventional understanding, there is really no place for them.

Below is the political spectrum drawn in a way that encompasses the full width of the political landscape.

Correct delineation of the political spectrum

In this paradigm, the spectrum is delineated by the degree of statism intended and aspired to by various political actors and ideologies. Thus, on the extreme left you have statist totalitarians while on the opposite side you have non-statists and state minimalists.

Actors on the political spectrum

With the corrected paradigm, we now easily find a proper place for classical liberals and libertarians. At the same time, Hitler – a Nazi socialist who built a powerful German state – is placed where he belongs on the left side, somewhat downstream from full-out statists like Stalin, Lenin or Castro.The Naked Communist: E…Skousen, W. CleonBuy New $17.89(as of 04:16 EDT – Details)

Some observations on the correctly delineated spectrumhttps://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-9106533008329745&output=html&h=280&adk=3374547769&adf=2049913861&w=649&fwrn=4&fwrnh=100&lmt=1601838708&num_ads=1&rafmt=1&armr=3&sem=mc&pwprc=8684081392&psa=1&guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&ad_type=text_image&format=649×280&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F2020%2F10%2Fvasko-kohlmayer%2Fthe-political-spectrum-the-correct-delineation%2F&flash=0&fwr=0&pra=3&rh=163&rw=649&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&wgl=1&fa=27&adsid=ChEI8OXl-wUQiuyHis_dutqkARIvAEXiIBqOeo7vpUKE8Du4yQBSeUtbUWzsm_ef0tZUT7se3ImCnVrHxPE1ru6lzrI&tt_state=W3siaXNzdWVyT3JpZ2luIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hZHNlcnZpY2UuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbSIsInN0YXRlIjowfV0.&dt=1601856331849&bpp=19&bdt=1674&idt=-M&shv=r20201001&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3D7e035107d994f3bb-22b95d5edec3002b%3AT%3D1601840295%3ART%3D1601840295%3AS%3DALNI_Mas_JcAi1m_7PLwCHBRdT9I905eEg&prev_fmts=0x0&nras=2&correlator=6272257710037&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1905934101.1599339146&ga_sid=1601856331&ga_hid=1475026229&ga_fc=0&iag=0&icsg=2287184962555840&dssz=50&mdo=0&mso=0&u_tz=-240&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=1138&u_w=712&u_ah=1138&u_aw=712&u_cd=24&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&adx=16&ady=2019&biw=712&bih=970&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=21067599%2C21066973&oid=3&pvsid=4321077099442576&pem=653&rx=0&eae=0&fc=1408&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C712%2C0%2C712%2C970%2C712%2C970&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7Cs%7C&abl=NS&fu=8320&bc=31&jar=2020-10-05-00&ifi=12&uci=a!c&btvi=1&fsb=1&xpc=dgb6d9fo79&p=https%3A//www.lewrockwell.com&dtd=69

We now see that the conventional paradigm only presents the left portion of the spectrum and not the whole extent of it. This misunderstanding has been consciously planted and cultivated by the left which had several good reasons for propagating this distortion. Their first concern was to distance themselves from Hitler, their socialist brother. We explained earlier how they were able to pull it off: “What gave the leftists a cover for their obfuscation was Hitler’s racism and nationalism which he superimposed on his socialist underpinnings. This muddied the waters just enough to make the lie possible. The truth, however, remains that fundamentally Hitler was your standard socialist.”

The obfuscation enabled leftists appear to be removed from or even opposite of Hitler. This was a masterstroke of propaganda given that Hitler is their ideological bedfellow. We have shown previously how the two share fundamental inclinations in the Ideological Pedigree Table of Values and Views. As such, they stand shoulder to shoulder on the political spectrum. Hitler was a leader whose socialism was mixed with strong elements of racism and nationalism. Today’s Democratic party – which has been recently taken over by its radical elements – is a present-day version of the Nazis in the American context. Both are socialists who are strongly racist and nationalistic. The only difference is the target of their racism – whites vs Jews – and the direction of their nationalism: negative vs positive (for more detailed treatment of this see here).

The left’s inversion of the political paradigm has had the further advantage of placing their ideological opponents – those advocating a more limited state – on the same half of the spectrum as Hitler thus creating an appearance of affinity even though in reality they are opposites.

The Naked SocialistSkousen, Paul B.Best Price: $25.82Buy New $24.95(as of 03:32 EDT – Details)By placing themselves close to the center, leftists have managed to make themselves look moderate and reasonable. Their feigned modesty was designed to increase their appeal to the common man for whom they purport to care. Nothing, however, could be further from the truth. The moment leftists gain power they make life miserable for the very people they claim to champion. Just ask the workers of the Soviet Union, Hitler’s German Volk, Mao’s peasants or the people of Cuba how good and pleasant was life under their leftist rulers.https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-9106533008329745&output=html&h=280&adk=3374547769&adf=3588755813&w=649&fwrn=4&fwrnh=100&lmt=1601838708&num_ads=1&rafmt=1&armr=3&sem=mc&pwprc=8684081392&psa=1&guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&ad_type=text_image&format=649×280&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F2020%2F10%2Fvasko-kohlmayer%2Fthe-political-spectrum-the-correct-delineation%2F&flash=0&fwr=0&pra=3&rh=163&rw=649&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&wgl=1&fa=27&adsid=ChEI8OXl-wUQiuyHis_dutqkARIvAEXiIBqOeo7vpUKE8Du4yQBSeUtbUWzsm_ef0tZUT7se3ImCnVrHxPE1ru6lzrI&tt_state=W3siaXNzdWVyT3JpZ2luIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hZHNlcnZpY2UuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbSIsInN0YXRlIjowfV0.&dt=1601856331849&bpp=5&bdt=1674&idt=-M&shv=r20201001&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3D7e035107d994f3bb-22b95d5edec3002b%3AT%3D1601840295%3ART%3D1601840295%3AS%3DALNI_Mas_JcAi1m_7PLwCHBRdT9I905eEg&prev_fmts=0x0%2C649x280&nras=3&correlator=6272257710037&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1905934101.1599339146&ga_sid=1601856331&ga_hid=1475026229&ga_fc=0&iag=0&icsg=2287184962555840&dssz=51&mdo=0&mso=0&u_tz=-240&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=1138&u_w=712&u_ah=1138&u_aw=712&u_cd=24&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&adx=16&ady=3087&biw=712&bih=970&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=21067599%2C21066973&oid=3&pvsid=4321077099442576&pem=653&rx=0&eae=0&fc=1408&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C712%2C0%2C712%2C970%2C712%2C970&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7Cs%7C&abl=NS&fu=8320&bc=31&jar=2020-10-05-00&ifi=13&uci=a!d&btvi=2&fsb=1&xpc=ZpqOjy5GzS&p=https%3A//www.lewrockwell.com&dtd=111

On the most fundamental level, a leftist is someone who advocates state control over the means of production. This control can be complete or partial. It can be in the form of direct ownership by the state or by indirect ownership through state-mandated entities or agents. Control over the means of production can also be achieved through various forms of legislative, administrative and regulatory mechanisms. The degree of control intended determines where on the left side of the spectrum one stands.

The left side of the political spectrum can be broadly divided into two parts: the hard left and the soft left. The line of demarcation is not always sharply defined. Hard leftists advocate complete or near-complete socialization of the economy and a powerful centralized state. Moderate or soft leftists strive for a less statist arrangement. The hard left is always made up of either actual or potential totalitarians and murderers. To the soft left belong, for the most part, the self-serving bunglers.

Division of the political left into two zones

It is impossible to exercise a significant measure of control over the means of production without becoming authoritarian. This is because such control goes against the natural flow of things. To achieve it, you need coercion and violence (or at least the explicit threat of it). The greater the degree of control you seek, the more authoritarian you must become. Complete or near complete control requires one to become a totalitarian. Such a high level of state control over the means of production can only be implemented through mass murder. This has been the case in every country where such control has been achieved (see The Black Book of Communism). It is a kind of Faustian bargain: you gain power and control but in return you have to sell your soul, i.e., you must oppress, coerce and kill. Apparently, certain types do it quite gladly.

Socialists are leftists. The terms socialist and leftist can be used interchangeably although only in a rough and imprecise way. There have been many different modes and varieties of socialism – both attempted in practice and formulated as theories – and this term is very difficult to define. Even socialists themselves do not agree on what socialism actually means or entails and there are constant arguments and infighting among them. Given the lack of definitional clarity in regard to the term socialism, it is generally more productive to use the term leftist insteadMasters Of Deceit: The…Hoover, J. EdgarBuy New $7.99(as of 05:22 EDT – Details).https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-9106533008329745&output=html&h=280&adk=3374547769&adf=3514941127&w=649&fwrn=4&fwrnh=100&lmt=1601838708&num_ads=1&rafmt=1&armr=3&sem=mc&pwprc=8684081392&psa=1&guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&ad_type=text_image&format=649×280&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F2020%2F10%2Fvasko-kohlmayer%2Fthe-political-spectrum-the-correct-delineation%2F&flash=0&fwr=0&pra=3&rh=163&rw=649&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&wgl=1&fa=27&adsid=ChEI8OXl-wUQiuyHis_dutqkARIvAEXiIBqOeo7vpUKE8Du4yQBSeUtbUWzsm_ef0tZUT7se3ImCnVrHxPE1ru6lzrI&tt_state=W3siaXNzdWVyT3JpZ2luIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hZHNlcnZpY2UuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbSIsInN0YXRlIjowfV0.&dt=1601856331849&bpp=4&bdt=1674&idt=-M&shv=r20201001&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3D7e035107d994f3bb-22b95d5edec3002b%3AT%3D1601840295%3ART%3D1601840295%3AS%3DALNI_Mas_JcAi1m_7PLwCHBRdT9I905eEg&prev_fmts=0x0%2C649x280%2C649x280&nras=4&correlator=6272257710037&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1905934101.1599339146&ga_sid=1601856331&ga_hid=1475026229&ga_fc=0&iag=0&icsg=2287184962555840&dssz=51&mdo=0&mso=0&u_tz=-240&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=1138&u_w=712&u_ah=1138&u_aw=712&u_cd=24&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&adx=16&ady=4462&biw=712&bih=970&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=21067599%2C21066973&oid=3&pvsid=4321077099442576&pem=653&rx=0&eae=0&fc=1408&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C712%2C0%2C712%2C970%2C712%2C970&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7Cs%7C&abl=NS&fu=8320&bc=31&jar=2020-10-05-00&ifi=14&uci=a!e&btvi=3&fsb=1&xpc=4TzjgNSqNN&p=https%3A//www.lewrockwell.com&dtd=129

On the hard left you have traditional communists and far left socialists including the Nazis. On the soft left you would have the post-war western European socialist and labor parties. Today’s GOP and the Conservative Party in Great Britain also belong to the right side of the soft left. Political parties are not permanently fixed at one position on the spectrum; they tend to move and shift within a certain range depending on which faction controls them at any given time. We have seen an instance of a fairly dramatic move recently in the US where the Democratic Party has been taken over by the extreme elements within its ranks and consequently lurched sharply leftward. As it currently stands, the US Democratic Party is a hard left party controlled by left-wing extremists and it behaves accordingly. For example, its highest officials openly encourage rioting, violence and destruction of cities while deliberately tying the hands of law enforcement and shielding perpetrators from persecution. The latest instance of this is the Democratic vice-presidential candidate Kamala Harris who praised Black Lives Matter as “brilliant.”

As you may know, BLM is a revolutionary outfit founded by Marxists. The riots that have torn America apart and caused billions of dollars in damage have been conducted under the auspices of BLM, which has launched this destructive movement under the false pretenses of systemic racism. Senator Harris’s praise of BLM comes on the heels of her June interview in which she openly called on BLM and their collaborators to continue the violence and destruction. This is what she said:

“Everyone beware because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop before election day in November, and they’re not going to stop after election day. And everyone should take note of that… they’re not going to let up—and they should not. And we should not.”

Please note that this statement was not made by some fringe anarchist. This is incitement to lawlessness, violence and anarchy is coming from the highest echelons of the Democratic party. Also please notice Harris’ use of the pronoun “we.” This is an explicit acknowledgement that Democrats on the highest levels approve of and are part of this violent criminal movement.

Not to be outdone, and in keeping with the tried-and-true tactics of the hard left, Hillary Clinton, former Democratic nominee for president, has called on Democrats – in direct subversion of the democratic process – not to concede the upcoming election “under any circumstances.” This is how she put it:

“Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances, because I think this is gonna drag out and eventually I do believe he will win if we don’t give an inch.”https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-9106533008329745&output=html&h=280&adk=3374547769&adf=2521388357&w=649&fwrn=4&fwrnh=100&lmt=1601838708&num_ads=1&rafmt=1&armr=3&sem=mc&pwprc=8684081392&psa=1&guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&ad_type=text_image&format=649×280&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F2020%2F10%2Fvasko-kohlmayer%2Fthe-political-spectrum-the-correct-delineation%2F&flash=0&fwr=0&pra=3&rh=163&rw=649&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&wgl=1&fa=27&adsid=ChEI8OXl-wUQiuyHis_dutqkARIvAEXiIBqOeo7vpUKE8Du4yQBSeUtbUWzsm_ef0tZUT7se3ImCnVrHxPE1ru6lzrI&tt_state=W3siaXNzdWVyT3JpZ2luIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hZHNlcnZpY2UuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbSIsInN0YXRlIjowfV0.&dt=1601856331849&bpp=4&bdt=1674&idt=5&shv=r20201001&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3D7e035107d994f3bb-22b95d5edec3002b%3AT%3D1601840295%3ART%3D1601840295%3AS%3DALNI_Mas_JcAi1m_7PLwCHBRdT9I905eEg&prev_fmts=0x0%2C649x280%2C649x280%2C649x280&nras=5&correlator=6272257710037&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1905934101.1599339146&ga_sid=1601856331&ga_hid=1475026229&ga_fc=0&iag=0&icsg=2287184962555840&dssz=51&mdo=0&mso=0&u_tz=-240&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=1138&u_w=712&u_ah=1138&u_aw=712&u_cd=24&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&adx=16&ady=5515&biw=712&bih=970&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=21067599%2C21066973&oid=3&pvsid=4321077099442576&pem=653&rx=0&eae=0&fc=1408&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C712%2C0%2C712%2C970%2C712%2C970&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7Cs%7C&abl=NS&fu=8320&bc=31&jar=2020-10-05-00&ifi=15&uci=a!f&btvi=4&fsb=1&xpc=hmok2zN1nw&p=https%3A//www.lewrockwell.com&dtd=146

Hillary Clinton’s stance is indicative of the present dynamic within the Democratic party. Having begun as a leftist radical in the 60s, Clinton became in her ripe age a hardened establishment politician for whom considerations of power and money took precedence over her youthful socialist ideals. Her transformation was so complete that she eventually became something of a neocon. So much so that a number of high-level Republican operatives voted for her over Donald Trump in the 2016 elections. But with the recent capture of her Party by its radical elements, Hillary Clinton – in an apparent effort to remain relevant internally – has moved sharply leftward, closer toward her youthful roots. As a proper radical, she now openly advocates the subversion of democracy and election theft. It would not be at all surprising if one of these days she goes all out and begins speaking of “Revolution.” This is truly a pity, because Mrs. Clinton has arrived at a point in her life where she could at least attempt to bring some sanity and moral sense into the situation. She could try to position herself the Grand Dame of the Democratic Party and condemn the criminal behavior of the democrat mobs who are ravaging and terrorizing this country. But rather than doing what is right and decent, she is pouring more vitriol on the fire.

Both Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton know exactly what they are doing. With the left’s ugly nature now on full display, they sense they are going to lose electorally, but this does not discourage them in any way. They will instead try to gain power by other means. After all, the hard left has rarely come into power via the democratic process. The reason for this is quite simple: people generally grasp that despite their rhetoric there is something deeply wrong with these leaders and their twisted programs. As a result, socialists and communists almost invariably seize power through undemocratic means such as coup d’états, insurrections, parliamentary coups, election theft and such. These high-level Democratic politicians behave exactly like the Nazi and Bolshevik operatives did in their time. In a repeat of history, their gangs of looting followers on the streets of America are the equivalent of Hitler’s Brown Shirts and Lenin’s red mobs.The Devil and Karl Mar…Kengor, PaulBest Price: $39.90Buy New $26.96(as of 04:44 EDT – Details)

People who gravitate toward the hard left are usually driven there by the dark impulses of their psyches which they seek to discharge through political activism. This has been true in the past and it is also true now. Many of the far-left leaders have been narcissist psychopaths with little or no empathy for fellow human beings. These days you can observe the connection between psychological disturbance and far left activism when you watch the woke and progressives in action.

The vast majority of them are clearly troubled individuals. They are usually highly self-absorbed, angry and emotionally disturbed. You can watch a telling video of a liberal woman having a meltdown over the death Ruth Bader Ginsburg while driving in a car. This is what she shrieks in part:

“Holy f—king shit, you guys! I am driving the car but I just go a notification that Ruth Bader Ginsberg died! F-ck! Could this year get any f-cking worse?!

The woman then howls and shakes as if she were possessed. If you watch the video, you will notice that she is not actually upset about the death of a human being but about the fact that Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not manage to hang on a little longer so that Trump would be deprived of the opportunity to nominate her replacement before the election. “Ruth,” she screams wildly, “you just had to make it to 2021!”

Needless to say, the woman looks better adjusted than most of her ideological compadres these days. Apart from the obvious lack of empathy, many among the woke also exhibit sexual abnormalities of various kinds such as homosexual behavior or thinking that they belong to the opposite biological sex (a condition known as gender dysphoria). Some woke activists even claim there are more than one hundred types of gender. When the British TV show host Piers Morgan challenged this idea late last year the woke launched a campaign to have him cancelled. These days you can find these cancel types at the ongoing BLM riots where they shout and scream about a problem that does not exist.

Needless to say, these types are angry, intolerant, unloving and vindictive. They are ever ready to cancel and destroy anyone who disagrees or opposes them.

They exhibit the same tendencies that the hard left has always displayed: hatred of free speech, proclivity toward violence, suppression of dissent, racism, atheism, dehumanization of opponents, accusations of thought crimes, intimidation of dissenters, etc. Should they obtain the power they so feverishly seek, they will undoubtedly use it in the same cruel ways their ideological brothers have always done.

The Beauty of Life is Being Systematically Destroyed by the COVID Hoax

Posted on October 4, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

Witnessing the panoply of beauty in all of nature takes us out of our shell of self-absorption and makes us realize that we are merely bit players in the game of life. Witnessing the majesty of beauty confirms that the real show lies outside us to observe and appreciate and not inside us to transfix us. True beauty charms us into seeing the grandeur of goodness that surrounds us and by doing so, the pristine splendor of nature releases us from wallowing in the poverty of our self-idealization. The bewitching spell cast by the exquisiteness of nature levitates our souls and transforms our psyche. When we see, hear, taste, smell, or touch what is beautiful, we cannot suppress the urge to replicate its baffling texture by singing, dancing, painting, or writing. Opening our eye to the loveliness of a single flower is how we stay in touch with the glorious pageantry of living.”

~ Kilroy J. Oldster, Dead Toad Scrolls

In order for ugliness and evil to conquer beauty, first beauty must be made to seem ugly and evil. If beauty is feared, if it is portrayed as a threat to life, then an intentional manipulation of the human mind and psyche can cause a flight from beauty so as to gain protection from concocted harm. This is akin to hiding in the dark instead of seeking the light. Should this situation be perpetuated long enough, beauty in the minds of man can become the enemy instead of the essence of life. Without beauty, life becomes emotionless and cold, and therefore a bland existence dependent on rule becomes the norm, while joy and wonder disappear. This is the world we are experiencing today, as evil forces are attempting to kill the human spirit, which in turn will destroy the beauty of life.Dead Toad ScrollsOldster, Kilroy J.Buy New $7.99(as of 05:23 EDT – Details)

This is being accomplished due to fear of the unknown, a manufactured fear purposely meant to cause panic and chaos. None of this is natural, but is a planned conspiracy with the sole purpose of creating an atmosphere of such extreme apprehension as to cause humanity to give up all that is dear to them in order to survive the false threat. That threat has to be thought to be so great that the people will feel obligated to obey the ruling class without question as a condition of survival. If fear can be sustained at this level, total control over the masses becomes an easy task.

All the state players had to do was to invent something so scary that the public would cower and hide, and succumb to tyrannical rule. Creating out of thin air a virus less deadly than the common cold, and portraying it as the new plague of mankind, was all that was necessary to gain compliance and adherence to draconian measures. The success of this coup is dependent on constant fear, and on continuous division. The fear aspect is evident, but will have to be enhanced, and the division amongst the people is being stoked daily, and will soon escalate to dangerous levels during another ridiculous election that will be used to cause mass panic inside an already mass panic. There will be multiple ‘claimed’ calamities that will adversely affect all aspects of society. These will be health related of course, but also will be economic, will breed civil unrest, and will cause violent reaction in the streets. With this chaos will come martial law, either in isolated areas or more broad-based, depending on the coming carnage created and allowed by the state.https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-9106533008329745&output=html&h=280&adk=3966056743&adf=1213655162&w=649&fwrn=4&fwrnh=100&lmt=1601838549&num_ads=1&rafmt=1&armr=3&sem=mc&pwprc=8684081392&psa=1&guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&ad_type=text_image&format=649×280&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F2020%2F10%2Fgary-d-barnett%2Fthe-beauty-of-life-is-being-systematically-destroyed-by-the-covid-hoax%2F&flash=0&fwr=0&pra=3&rh=163&rw=649&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&wgl=1&fa=27&adsid=ChEI8OXl-wUQiuyHis_dutqkARIvAEXiIBobtPHOXWXbJTD4PlLK5qV4g1imOH1h8XOqcHogOm_9VUUALV2s1814LsI&tt_state=W3siaXNzdWVyT3JpZ2luIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hZHNlcnZpY2UuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbSIsInN0YXRlIjowfV0.&dt=1601839075769&bpp=18&bdt=1836&idt=-M&shv=r20201001&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3D7e035107d994f3bb-224d11fce3c3007a%3AT%3D1601839030%3ART%3D1601839030%3AS%3DALNI_MbgSJuzuEDdVT7U11faYbgqWl4Oxw&prev_fmts=0x0&nras=2&correlator=7244644614929&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1905934101.1599339146&ga_sid=1601839075&ga_hid=1983507662&ga_fc=0&iag=0&icsg=141488020918208&dssz=52&mdo=0&mso=0&u_tz=-240&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=1138&u_w=712&u_ah=1138&u_aw=712&u_cd=24&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&adx=16&ady=1640&biw=712&bih=970&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=42530671%2C21066973&oid=3&pvsid=1719889119723952&pem=653&rx=0&eae=0&fc=1408&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C712%2C0%2C712%2C970%2C712%2C970&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7Cs%7C&abl=NS&fu=8320&bc=31&jar=2020-10-04-19&ifi=12&uci=a!c&btvi=1&fsb=1&xpc=AgCPdeiWLT&p=https%3A//www.lewrockwell.com&dtd=100

Life of PiMartel, YannBest Price: $0.35Buy New $4.48(as of 05:23 EDT – Details)The scene is set, and most of the masses are ripe for takeover, as the beauty in their lives has already been largely eliminated. When one thinks of all the joys in life, many things come to mind. Family of course is vital, but families are being isolated, quarantined, and threatened continuously. Some family members are dying (or being murdered), and are not allowed to see their own; while laws are now being considered that could allow children to be taken away from parents during isolation. Travel is becoming impossible, especially considering travel outside this or any other country. The beauty and wonder of far away places and cultures are now out of reach. In most parts of the world, getting out in nature is now very difficult, and outdoor excursions around the world are not allowed or are heavily restricted. Live concerts are a thing of the past, so music, which is a miracle of life, is being squelched. The same is true of dancing, artistry, art shows and fares, and gatherings of different peoples experiencing beauty and the fascination of life and genius. Food, exotic cuisines, gourmet gatherings, the excitement of restaurant experiences, and even backyard barbeques are in many cases not allowed or made meaningless by mandated and insane rules. Sports at all levels have been ruined, and are nothing more than contemptible jokes played in empty stadiums.

All of this ugly absurdity now exists, but the most beautiful thing in life is also being destroyed before our eyes. That is the beauty of love and caring. It was once said that “love is a many splendored thing,” and that may be an understatement, as what more defines the human spirit than love? Today, people are wearing harmful and useless masks, they are told not to get close to any other; they are voluntarily for the most part locking themselves inside home prisons, and are not even allowed to work or be with co-workers. People are becoming unrecognizable zombies, frightened of all strangers, friends, and even family. Romance and passion are shunned and in some parts of the world forbidden due to this virus hoax, so many have acquiesced to this travesty, and now most all communication is via a cold and impersonal computer screen. The idea of a robotic humanity without feeling now seems possible, and is even being promoted; and in some parts of the world, it is being actively sought. This insanity is no longer science fiction, but is on the verge of reality. No good can come from this horror.When China Sneezes: Fr…Buy New $27.95(as of 05:23 EDT – Details)https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?client=ca-pub-9106533008329745&output=html&h=250&adk=127772223&adf=3231188144&w=649&fwrn=4&fwrnh=100&lmt=1601838549&num_ads=1&rafmt=1&armr=3&sem=mc&pwprc=8684081392&psa=1&guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&ad_type=text_image&format=649×250&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F2020%2F10%2Fgary-d-barnett%2Fthe-beauty-of-life-is-being-systematically-destroyed-by-the-covid-hoax%2F&flash=0&fwr=0&pra=3&rh=163&rw=649&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&wgl=1&fa=27&adsid=ChEI8OXl-wUQiuyHis_dutqkARIvAEXiIBobtPHOXWXbJTD4PlLK5qV4g1imOH1h8XOqcHogOm_9VUUALV2s1814LsI&tt_state=W3siaXNzdWVyT3JpZ2luIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hZHNlcnZpY2UuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbSIsInN0YXRlIjowfV0.&dt=1601839075769&bpp=5&bdt=1836&idt=6&shv=r20201001&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3D7e035107d994f3bb-224d11fce3c3007a%3AT%3D1601839030%3ART%3D1601839030%3AS%3DALNI_MbgSJuzuEDdVT7U11faYbgqWl4Oxw&prev_fmts=0x0%2C649x280&nras=3&correlator=7244644614929&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1905934101.1599339146&ga_sid=1601839075&ga_hid=1983507662&ga_fc=0&iag=0&icsg=141488020918208&dssz=53&mdo=0&mso=0&u_tz=-240&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=1138&u_w=712&u_ah=1138&u_aw=712&u_cd=24&u_nplug=0&u_nmime=0&adx=16&ady=2816&biw=712&bih=970&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=42530671%2C21066973&oid=3&pvsid=1719889119723952&pem=653&rx=0&eae=0&fc=1408&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C712%2C0%2C712%2C970%2C712%2C970&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7Cs%7C&abl=NS&fu=8320&bc=31&jar=2020-10-04-19&ifi=13&uci=a!d&btvi=2&fsb=1&xpc=OrsVV81wNl&p=https%3A//www.lewrockwell.com&dtd=122

There are reasons for this madness, but those reasons are nefarious and are being pursued by the worst among us. Only the few that claim superiority over the rest of society will benefit from this lunacy. They desire to own everything, including the souls of humanity. They seek total power and control over all, and the only way to achieve that control is to destroy all the beauty and love in life. In order for that effort is to be successful, the rest of us have to lay down and surrender, and give our consent to the monsters attempting to own our minds, bodies, and souls by accepting that a manufactured virus is all that is necessary to destroy us. Once beauty, love, and passion are lost, and fear consumes you, all desire for freedom disappears; all that is left is the wait for death.

“I must say a word about fear. It is life’s only true opponent. Only fear can defeat life. It is a clever, treacherous adversary, how well I know. It has no decency, respects no law or convention, shows no mercy. It goes for your weakest spot, which it finds with unnerving ease. It begins in your mind, always … so you must fight hard to express it. You must fight hard to shine the light of words upon it. Because if you don’t, if your fear becomes a wordless darkness that you avoid, perhaps even manage to forget, you open yourself to further attacks of fear because you never truly fought the opponent who defeated you.”

~ Yann Martel, Life of Pi

The Best of Gary D. BarnettGary D. Barnett [send him mail] is a retired investment professional that has been writing about freedom and liberty matters, politics, and history for two decades. He is against all war and aggression, and against the state. He recently finished a collaboration with former U.S. Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney, and was a contributor to her new book, “When China Sneezes” From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Political-Economic Crisis.” Currently, he lives in Montana with his wife and son. Visit his website.

The Democrats Long-Standing Temper Tantrum will Re-elect President Trump

Posted on October 4, 2020 by theartfuldilettante

It’s quite obvious to me that the Deep State and the Democratic Party that staffs it never got over the fact that their nefarious misuse of our intelligence agencies and hoodwinking the media didn’t work any better than their constant efforts after his election to remove Donald Trump from office and continue their autocratic grifting. This week was no exception. Indeed, I have to agree with Roger L. Simon that “In the aftermath of Trump’s contracting Covid-19, they are reelecting him.”

The Debate

Any sentient viewer of this week’s debate had to be disgusted. The moderator, the questions, the format all combined to make this an upscale version of an old-time “Saturday Night Live” debate. I have believed for a long time that there should be a timekeeper and no moderator. That the debate should be on one national policy question with each candidate given 20 minutes to make his case and the remaining time left for rebuttal. Instead, Chris Wallace used his role to interrupt the president, prop up the failing Biden, and ask questions about “white supremacy” long answered — even to him in 2016 — in an effort clearly to smear Trump.

Ben Domenech correctly places the blame for this format on the out-of-date debate commission, tweeting:

The Commission on Presidential Debates is a relic. Its board contains mostly people born in the 1930s and 40s. It is the reason there are no internet based debates. Its executive director has led it since before the end of the Cold War. It must end. The Commission’s approach creates debates that are unintelligible and with moderators who cannot effectively extract the truth. They are asking 1980s questions in a 1970s format. This must end.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/9371484590420070?pubid=ld-8832-1542&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanthinker.com&rid=www.americanthinker.com&width=692

Even with the assistance of Wallace’s entire body on the scale, Biden failed utterly on any level of credibility. Within days after saying in the debate that he did not support the absurd Green New Deal, his staff said he did. This is par for the course of his entire political career. (From March 13 to April 3, even his strong propaganda outlet, the Washington Post, gave him 11 Pinocchios respecting his claims about the President’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis.) He has lied about virtually everything, including having attended Delaware State (a black college), to attributing the death of his first wife and daughter to a drunk driver; to his academic career. (I mention these things out of a lifetime of dissembling because they are so easily determined false that he either cannot distinguish fact from fantasy or thinks no one else can.) Among other things in the debate, he misquotes FBI Director Chris Wray as having said “Antifa is an idea, not an organization.” In fact, as a conservative trans woman who went undercover with Antifa in Portland reports Antifa is not “an idea”, it is real and seeks to rule by terror. They operate by “affinity groups.” It is “guerrilla warfare.”

Basically they’re baiting the police into overreacting. [snip] If you just go in public and pick someone and start pushing them, if you keep pushing then, they’re going to slug you; it’s just how it’s going to work, at the individual level but also at the group level, too. [snip] what they want to do it make it difficult for people they don’t like to organize.

She explains that their tactics either force people to back down or slug them, and to them, either way is a win. (Especially so because they block from viewing any press which is not sympathetic to them. And some prosecutors are with them, if you want an explanation of why Kyle Rittenhouse who was clearly defending himself against these street thugs is being prosecuted.)

They are sophisticated operationally, coordinated but not like their predecessor the Weather Underground was. It includes hackers “who never hit the streets,” a “loose-knit network of people” in their twenties to thirties, intoxicated by the lure of violence and struggle.

COVID runs through the White House

The President, First Lady, Kellyanne Conway, campaign manager Bill Stepien, three White House reporters, and three key Republican Senators (Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, and Thom Tillis) have all tested positive for COVID-19. So just as the slugging match about who “won” the nondebate debacle was dying down, the perfervid reporting and pontificating about how this happened and what it means took flight.

Because the term “cases” has been so misstated by a media that loves to create panic when none is called for, it’s worth examining what this means.

So what do these headlines really mean? What exactly is a COVID “case”?
Since the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak, most US media outlets have been exceedingly credulous and complicit in their reporting. Journalists almost uniformly promote what we can call the “prolockdown” narrative, which is to wildly exaggerate the risks from COVID-19 to serve a political agenda. They may be motivated to hurt Trump politically, to promote a more socialist “new normal,” or simply to drive more clicks and views. Bad news sells. But the bias is clear and undeniable.
This explains why media outlets use the terms “case” and “infection” so loosely, to the point of actively misinforming the public…
Take a perfectly healthy person with no particular symptoms and swab the inside of their nose. If the culture shows the presence of staphylococcus aureus, do we insist they have a staph infection?
— A virus is not a disease. Only a very small percentage of those exposed to the virus itself — SARS-CoV-2 — show any kind of acute respiratory symptoms, or what we can call “coronavirus disease.”
The only meaningful statistics show the incidence of serious illness, hospitalizations, and deaths. The single most important statistic among these is the infection fatality rate (IFR). Data collected through July shows [4] that the IFR for those under age forty-five is actually lower than that of the common flu. The COVID-19 IFR rises for those over fifty, but it is hardly a death sentence. And the data does not segregate those with preexisting health issues caused by obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. If we could see data only for reasonably healthy people under fifty, the numbers would be even more reassuring.

Yes, the media was dishonest in covering the health issues of Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, so it’s not unreasonable to be skeptical of health reports on any president, but by his appearance as he left for Walter Reed Hospital, his tweets, and the reports of his physicians and those on the spot, the President’s “case” is asymptomatic or mild, so the fact that he has tested positive “is essentially meaningless.” People in this stage are sick for a few days and then they are not.

If this were more widely known and understood, the lockdowns by Democratic governors would never be justified, and there is every reason to note the harm caused by the eight months of lockdowns outweigh the harm from the virus. As author Jeff Deist concludes, “we have had nearly eight months of life and liberty stolen from us by politicians and their hysteria-promoting accomplices in the media. How much more will we accept?”

(As a footnote — when Obama was president 60 million Americans got the H1N1 swine flu. Did you know that? How widely was it reported? And did you know that once tests indicated how widely it was spreading that White House halted the testing?)

The hypercoverage of COVID-19 has tipped a lot of hands. Nancy Pelosi is already measuring drapes for the Oval Office she hopes will be hers, the Democrats are cheering:

According to the newly released poll, 41 percent of Democrats are “indifferent” about Trump’s positive COVID-19 diagnosis, while a staggering 40 percent responded that they were “happy” about it. Republicans, however, were mostly “sad” (55 percent) and “worried” (51 percent).
Thirty-one percent of Democrats actually claimed to be “excited” at the news.
Excited? Is Trump Derangement Syndrome in the Democratic Party so bad that many Democrats are happy and excited about his diagnosis?

Twitter was full of so many tweets wishing Trump would die that it first said they would strike them and suspend the posters, and then backtracked on the suspension threat, deciding to just strike the death-wishing tweets.

The satire site Babylon Bee notices the party that wants to run your healthcare roots for its political opponent to die. (Let that one sink in. It’s satire but true.)

MSNBC’s execrable Joy Reid suggests the President is faking it to get out of the next debate. More class is shown by North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, who, according to Reuters says he “sincerely hopes” Trump recovers soon.

Will having to be quarantined for a while in a presidential suite in Walter Reed, instead of madly racing to rallies around the country harm his re-election chances? Kurt Schlichter doesn’t think so any more than Roger L. Simon does:

He can still talk to the press if he feels like it, he’ll just have to be in a plastic bubble. But if he doesn’t want to, he doesn’t have to, and then you have a press with no one to talk to, so maybe the pressure grows on Joe to fill the void. And when Joe fills a void, it’s like when Nadler fills his trousers.[snip]Their[The Democrats] dancing around hoping that Donald Trump will die, and that his wife will die too, is repellent to normal human beings. Since normal human beings are not a key liberal demographic, they probably don’t understand what psychos they sound like. The Democrats had to put the message out to their legions to stop rioting because that was freaking out the squares, and then stop trashing Amy Coney Barrett for liking Jesus and not being a barren, whiny, feminist shrew, because that was also freaking out the squares, and now publicly cheering on the death of the president and his wife will further freak out the squares.

He will garner sympathy from normal people, his condition will now dominate the news cycle, and he will, Schlichter notes, “get the best medical care in the world; he’s going to be just fine, and after burning up a couple of weeks in the White House he’s going to close the election with a barnstorming tour across the United States the likes of which we haven’t yet seen which will highlight his potency and contrast it with Oldfinger’s decrepitude.”

It’s not going to be like Mimi slowly perishing of tuberculosis in La Boheme. More like Gandalf in Lord of the Rings who returns more powerful than ever

The American Mind

THE ARTFUL DILETTANTE

Keeper of the Flame of the Enlightenment

Category Archives: liberty

How Much does the Government Really Know about You ?

Major Hurricane Brews in Gulf of Mexico, Threatens Louisiana, Florida

Louisiana House committee advances tax break proposals

Texas police officer charged with murder after reportedly killing black man who was described as a ‘pillar of the community’

Watch Fed Chair Powell Ask Congress For More Fiscal Stimulus

RELATED NEWS

25 Questions Kamala Harris Should Be Asked in the Debate

Watch: CNN’s John Berman Demands Producer Not Show Trump Taking Off Mask — ‘Please Take It Off Because That’s Going to Kill People’

WashPost: Kenosha Riot Casualties Lived Poor, Chaotic Lives in Outsourced City

Mike Pence Announces Campaign Events as Donald Trump Recovers from COVID-19

Trump Continues Virus Fight: ‘Maybe I’m Immune’

Rubio: Biden’s Calls on Cuba, Venezuela a ‘Total Joke’

Biden Scolds Trump: ‘Embarrassing for the Nation’ he Caught Coronavirus

Donald Trump: ‘We Are Learning to Live with COVID’ Just Like the Flu

TRENDING NEWS

Minnesota Rep. Seeing Ilhan Omar Voter Fraud Went to FBI But Due to Languid Response Contacted Project Veritas (VIDEO)

Report: Laptop, Memory Sticks to Program Philadelphia Voting Machines Stolen

Trump Gets Third Nomination for Nobel Peace Prize

Joe Biden had a Campaign Ad and Stickers Printed and Ready to Go Immediately After NY Times Broke its Trump Tax Story

The US should host a Royal Navy submarine at Guam

Democrats Launch Smear Attacks on Amy Coney Barrett’s Adopted Children

Biden Says Arabic Word Frequently Used by Muslims During Debate

Joe Biden Exploited S-Corporation Loophole to Avoid Payroll Tax

Self-censorship is Greatest Threat to Free Speech

Deep States Have Conspiracies; President Trump Does Not

Learning About the State

Pope Francis Goes Full Communist

Pope Francis Goes Full Communist

The Real Reason Leftists Can’t or Won’t Wish President Trump a Speedy Recovery

The Political Spectrum and its Correct Delineation

The Beauty of Life is Being Systematically Destroyed by the COVID Hoax

The Democrats Long-Standing Temper Tantrum will Re-elect President Trump